The authors regret that some references were incorrectly made in the original article and wish to note the correct references below: 1. “The extracted data was coded, categorised and then reduced into overarching themes to ensure that the data remained linked to the context. The findings were extracted using different colours for each study so that continual reference was made to the original article to synthesise ideas and provide new insights” (Murray et al., 2014).2. “For example, the specific qualitative approach of some studies was not always made explicit and a lack of information in the earlier articles made it difficult to judge credibility of recruitment or interview processes” (Murray et al., 2014).3. “As well as increasing the likelihood of bias when interpreting the data, a knowing relationship with the researcher may have implications for the openness and honesty of participants during interviews. If there is a potential bias, researchers need to describe how this is managed” (Murray et al., 2014).The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.
ASJC Scopus subject areas